What's the most desirable crime rate in an area to live in?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Medium crime.

Low crime areas are always either mind-numbingly boring or quite expensive. High crime areas also tend to be pretty boring in addition to the obvious. I know I used to rave about how high crime areas were more fun, but really, they usually aren't. Medium crime areas are fun and vibrant and can be affordable.

[Boston Bread]

I've always lived in low-crime areas, it's hard to imagine wishing for more crime...

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I've always lived in low-crime areas, it's hard to imagine wishing for more crime...

It's not the crime that's desirable, it's correlation. Low crime areas are always either rural or suburban areas that are boring as hell or gentrified places that are quite unaffordable. The only low crime areas that are ever fun to live are some college towns if you're in college.

[H. Ross Peron]

Low crime (don't want to be shot or mugged)

[Boston Bread]

Usually my preference is for medium/small sized cities which are within driving distance but not part of a large metro area. Both my university city and home city are examples of that; I'm not sure whether you would consider them suburban or not but they both have low crime rates. In general Canada's urban crime is much more tame, so it's not nearly as hard to find an active and low-crime urban area. Affordability would be the challenge.

[BaconBacon96]

Medium crime is better because it's more 'fun'. Jesus that attitude is immature. Obvious third option answer is obvious.

[Oakvale]

High crime (urban adventurer living on the razor's edge)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So then I'm immature because I haven't moved from where I live to a low crime suburb?

[TNF]

What kind of idiot wants to live in a 'high crime' area? Literally no one (aside from maybe some middle or upper class dipsh#ts who think it's 'exciting') who has to live in a high crime area wants to do so. They have to, more often than not, because they can't afford to live anywhere else.

[Antonio the Sixth]

lolbrtd

[Hatman 🍁]

low crime obviously. Things are different in Canada.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

TNF is right about high crime areas which also tend to be boring. But it's a fact that "hip" or "fun" neighborhoods are always at least medium crime. Low crime areas are always either insanely unaffordable or dull as dirt suburbs or rural areas.

[The Free North]

Is this some type of joke?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It was inspired by an IRC discussion and is more about correlation than causation.

I could've easily moved to Edina or Burnsville or somewhere like that sometime in the last couple years but have not. But crime is far higher where I live. So it's clear there's other factors involved otherwise no one who can afford it (which is plenty of people based on Census data) would live in urban areas.

One of my friends who lives one neighborhood over is an IT systems engineer. I think it's safe to say he doesn't live in a somewhat gritty urban neighborhood because he can't afford anywhere else.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

BTRD, I see the point you are trying to make.  Considering such, the way to phrase this poll would've been, "would you rather live in a TYPICAL high crime, TYPICAL medium crime, or TYPICAL low crime area. And yes, I would also take midtown Minneapolis over a suburb. 

[checkers]

Obviously I'd rather live in urban Minneapolis than a suburb, and if a slightly higher crime rate was the trade off for better cultural stuff, I'd take it -- but to actually prefer somewhere on the basis of it having a higher crime rate is just absurd and at worst kind of smacks of poverty tourism.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

I could deal with medium crime, but low crime would be ideal/desirable.

[Maxwell]

High Crime, but only if that means the crime is "getting high".

[King]

I live a high poverty/low crime zip code. It's charming but rare.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Those are not uncommon but all quite rural and boring.

[Torie]

Hudson on the two streets south of the main commercial drag, Warren Street, Union and Allen, is low crime. North of Warren, where I live, Columbia, State and Robinson, is low crime for violent crimes, and intermediate for non violent theft crimes. I live on the "wrong" side of tracks - about a third white, a third black, and a third "other," mostly Bangledeshi, with some Hispanics. I actually checked the murder rate before I bought into Robinson Street - there was one murder in Hudson in the last five years.

So on balance, Hudson is more than edgy enough for BRTD, maybe almost too edgy (edgy art - lots of art, musical and sculpture and paintings, lots of history, lots of book chat lectures, with interesting events several times a week all within a 10 minute walk, with a gay population that probably is about  10%-15% of the population, etc.), and is quite safe. I really don't know how to answer his question.

Where I lived before did have one of the lowest crime rates in the nation, and was boring - very boring. Incredibly pleasant and easy living, with one of the most "perfect" climates on this planet, with very clean air, and high paying jobs all around, but BORING.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

BRTD pls

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

High crime obviously.  Need to find a use of 7 years of Tae Kwon Do training.

[DemPGH]

Obviously low crime, but I can find things to do and or occupy myself if need be. That said, it is nice to have an urban area within driving distance.

I know folks in Cleveland, Pitt, and Erie who live in what have become over the years high crime areas (the mills and economy collapsed and in moved the dregs of society), and it truly sounds like a nightmare. You're at risk all the time of burglary, assault, etc. I can't imagine that being preferable to much of anything.

Low crime (don't want to be shot or mugged)

Yep. I value personal safety over lots of stuff going on.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

A BRTD anti-suburbia thread in all but name.